Religion and Terror I have been asked to write an essay that accounts for, explains and evaluates th e use

of terrorist activities by a religious extremist group to influence their society in an effort to achieve there own goals. My chosen conflict to evaluate is the right-wing Christian groups in the western ld, specifically America who are violently opposed to abortion and stem cell res earch. One of the reason religious violence is implemented in this conflict is due to t he extreme faith in their own beliefs that exists within the minds of those who undertake such actions. However what makes this conflict interesting is the way in which it has developed, for while the argument started as social debate conce rning the correct moral conduct and the common human rights of choice and life, it has since devolved into a conflict between a secular state and an religious s ocial group who is violently trying to enforce their own moral and doctrinal bel iefs onto others in society through the use of terrorist activities. They do thi s because they perceive that the state is actually encouraging what they believe to be the moral degradation and breakdown of society. As with almost all terrorist actions the main goals of such groups are to influe nce the actions of others within the society through the use of extreme violence . The most overt way this is achieved is by instilling fear into the society tha t s serves to suppress the basic human rights and moral beliefs of people by eithe r forcing them to follow the terrorists own beliefs and teachings or by injectin g enough fear into society that others are afraid of the repercussions that the y are unwilling to exercise their own rights. Another aim of such actions is to quash any information available to the public that could prove detrimental to th eir cause either by turning there own members against their beliefs or by causin g the public opinion to sway against them. Those groups involved in terrorist activities concerning abortion within the wes t use a common perspective in order to justify their actions both morally and re ligiously. The major aspect of this view is that if they perpetrate violence against those involved with abortion then they are protecting innocent unborn children from be ing murdered. As such they believe that while it is a sin to kill an other human, they are jus tified in there actions because they believe they are helping to save the lives of countless children by committing what they perceive to be the lesser of 2 evi ls. Such a view is perhaps best expressed by the extremis group, Army of God s jus tification of the actions undertaken by Paul hill and it s other followers with th e statement, "whatever force is legitimate to defend the life of a born child is legitimate to defend the life of an unborn child... if in fact Paul Hill did ki ll or wound abortionist John Britton, and accomplices James Barrett and Mrs. Bar rett, his actions are morally justified if they were necessary for the purpose o f defending innocent human life". To further justify and explain there violent commitment to their beliefs such gr oups use religious doctrines and beliefs to cement their commitment to the cause and incite violence in others. They justify such violence and actions religious ly by quoting teachings from the bible like thou shalt not kill . Other examples of religious teachings used to justify such violence include many things from the old testament like, an eye for an eye , or the new testament s numerous references t o unborn children as already being alive from the moment of conception such as i n, Luke 1.44 when Elizabeth greeted marry by saying behold, when the voice of yo ur greeting came to my ears, the babe in my womb leaped for joy , or in Jeremiah 1 .4-5 when God proclaimed Before I formed you in the womb I knew you, and before y ou were born I consecrated you". They use such teachings to argue that they are

wor

both morally and religiously obligated to carry out such acts of violence agains t others within society. It is hard to identify a clear cut distinction between religious extremist teach ings and mainstream teaching in this conflict due to the complex nature of the Chr istian faith cause by the existence of numerous denominations and sects who foll ow varying beliefs and doctrines. Therefore for the purposes of this essay I wil l take the Roman catholic teachings to be mainstream . The conflict between Christian extremists in America is unique in that the relig ious views expressed by extremist groups do not divert significantly form the te achings of more mainstream beliefs. In fact the biggest difference is in the dif ferent perspective with which they view the text, while mainstreams place the la rgest importance on the new testament teachings such as love thy neighbour , the mo re fundamentalist s place the greater importance on the =old testament and such co ncepts as an eye for an eye. With this in mind you can see that the major difference between the 2 concepts i s the means by which they spread their beliefs throughout the rest of society. W hile both mainstream and fundamentalist teaching both agree it is a cardinal sin to be involved in an act of abortion the more mainstream groups within society understand that under certain circumstances such action may be the only possible course that will be able to save life and even then it must be the last possibl e method undertaken. The other difference is the means through which they expres s themselves, the mainstream followers tend to be content to allow others their own personal beliefs however if they do need to spread the word they do so with ac ts such as public protest or awareness days designed to show the public the othe r side of the story as it were. The more extremist groups however are much more violent in both their propaganda i.e., distribution of pamphlets with various disturbing images on them, And in their more overt activities. This is because of the priority they give to their teachings, specifically the concept that if abortion is the murder of unb orn innocents then it stands to reason that abortions are the scenes of a new ty pe of holocaust. While this is essentially the same as mainstream teachings the belief that they are obligated through holy duty to prevent such an occurrence fro m happening by any means wether it be a single murder in the case of Paul hill, a series of them, or the car bombing of a clinic itself.

The terrorist activities undertaken by right-wing Christians in the USA are rema rkable in that unlike other terrorism hotspots, those undertaking them have mana ged to accomplish certain over the goals common to all terrorist movements. Name ly they have managed to instil enough fear and apprehension into society that pe ople are afraid to be involved with abortion clinics for fear that they or those they know will become a target of terrorist activities in the future. However w hile they are successful on a social level they have so far failed on a governme ntal one. In fact the use of extreme violence is causing governments to rethink any support they may have for religious groups involved in the abortion debate a nd if such governments turn upon such terrorist groups they will do so with brut al force as evidenced when Paul Hill was given the death sentence for murdering a doctor who worked in an abortion clinic, therefore in that perspective their t errorist actions have in fact been detrimental to the expansion of their cause. In conclusion I hope I have given you valuable insight into this strange and uni que instance of religious terrorism and that you found my essay both informative and enjoyable.